Memeorandum


Powered by TypePad

« Monday - Trial By (Or Of) Media | Main | Monday Post-Game Thread »

February 12, 2007

Comments

clarice

TM, I'm petrified to use your edit function and press my luck..If you can please make these changes (Novak is up)

****is finally notING a whole lot of things about this match he'd overlooked or missed before. Not the jury, though, they seem to get this very well********

topsecretkk9

-but he does seem to be wearing that washable seersucker suit again.--

this is the second mention I've read this...seersucker in winter? Prolly a bachelor thing.

Dan S

I mentioned in the other thread how impressive Woodward came across on the page. That applies to a lesser degree, but still applies, to the other two also.

And, of course, the contrast in cross-examinations is, to put it very mildly, striking. I wonder if the jury see that and realizes that one of two things is in play: (1) Fitz didn't interview these witnesses and doesn't want to risk asking the wrong question or (2) Fitz did interview these guys and doesn't want to risk asking the wrong question.

One could easily get the impression that Fitz is afraid to unravel his case (further) by probing these witnesses. I hope twelve ones got that impression too. The jury questions appear to show at least one there did.

Javani

"this is the second mention I've read this...seersucker in winter?"

A Clarence Darrow wannabe?

Neo

he {Woodwrd] said he'd told Pincus

My memory is slipping here, but didn't Pincus say that Woodward never told him.

Did Pincus ever meet the GJ to say so ?

Jay Currie

From FDL not a transcript of the bench conference:

"Wells: I'm going to call the Agent [Eckenrode] tomorrow. This is the one instance bc the notes cannot be found–there was a diligent search for the notes."

Thus the cat is released amidst the pigeons.

For some reason Fitz did not want to call his lead investigator and called the rather weak agent Bond instead. Somehow the notes of the Russett/Eckenrode conversation were lost. Fitz has been coy about who might have been present when Eckenrode interviewed Russett.

Hmmm.

Alcibiades

Pincus disputes Woodward on that point - says he doesn't remember that it happened - which is helpful for Libby because it shows everyone was forgetting - presumably because it only carried the full weight of the story later on.

Neo

Maybe it's his "lucky" seersucker suit.

Sort of like that lucky hat that John Kerry got from the CIA dude.

clarice

I think JOM should take a bow on Eckenrode..I doubt if we hadn't noticed and pointed this out, Eckenrode would be making his visit..Just my guess of course, and it could be egotism, but I doubt it.
Bravoe--TM and the horde..

Carol Herman

FROM CAROL HERMAN

RE: HOW I DRAW SOME THREADS TOGETHER

Awhile ago, Glenn Reynolds recommended reading Jan Crawford Greenburg's fantastic book: SUPREME CONFLICT.

In it, she describes how Rehnquist, and all the other Supreme-O's, were veered off the "Right's agenda," because they all read the WaPo. And, yes. "That" paper molds opinions. Especially the opinions of those thrown into the limelight.

Woodward, Pincus, and Novak, by testifying today, will probably ALSO write up some thoughts for publication, t'marra. (Not just our wonderful Clarice.)

These opinions will sway Walton. WHo seems somewhat clueless over the games the lawyers were playing out in front of his bench. He seemed quite clueless that Fitzgerald was a bully. And, he seemed to think, too, that "Libby MUST testify." WHich brings doubt raining down on him. To which: Did he sleep though some law classes? Was his Bar Examination results poorer than JFK, Jr's? Templesman had to help John-John out. (And, it took 3 attempts to finally pass.)

Again, Walton, too, seems to have been caught off guard.

And, Walton, too, listening to the WaPo "hot shots" today, and Novak; may become aware that history is also watching. He doesn't have to come off like the OJ jurors, ya know?

Larry

""lucky" seersucker suit." Matlock

Dan S

Apuzzo not as on today as he can be:

" WASHINGTON (AP) -- Jurors in the CIA leak trial on Monday heard a one-minute excerpt from Washington Post journalist Bob Woodward's tape recorder which revealed a top State Department official repeatedly discussing CIA operative Valerie Plame."

Plame wasn't mentioned at all. "Wilson's wife" was. This sort of conflation of identities is a problem where how she is referred to can help determine who passed along what, canary trap style. "Operative" was also not used, "analyst" was.

Get your facts in line, Apuzzo!

Javani

Clarice, all

I see at FDL Fitz mentioned "jury nullification" -- first and without any obvious instigation.

Sounds like he's nervous...

jwest

Think the Libby Defense Fund would send us a check if we billed them?

Or is this a contribution?

ghostcat

Why am I reminded of the old joke about the confused young man who meant to go to Cox to buy a seersucker suit, but went to Sears instead?

Javani

Novak's up!!

FDL:

""Novak sitting there looking shiftily from right to left, kind of sitting back in the seat.""

Ol' Slouchy at par.

Can't the prosecution and defense "just get along" here and both bash Novak for his comment that the CIA didn't warn him enough!

Average juror gonna think CIA says that to me, not only am I not blabbing, I'm forgetting!

Jury will think, Wells hopes, why is this dark character not on trial, but the puppyish Libby is?

Dwilkers

Lost notes my aching ass.

Special Prosecutor investigation of the WH and the lead FBI guy lost his notes of the key conversation with the witness that established the main counts in the indictment?

Riiiiiight.

cathyf
I think JOM should take a bow on Eckenrode..I doubt if we hadn't noticed and pointed this out, Eckenrode would be making his visit.
Hey, I think that Team Libby ought to petition to have some JOM postings submitted as evidence. You know, the judge can tell the jury that these threads are not submitted as evidence of the truth, but just for how they "prove" Fitzgerald's state of mind.

*smirk*

Dan S

VERY interesting. So defense has phone records of a reporter, and prosecution has no phone records of reporters?

I wonder how the jury will take this.

ROA

Dwilkers: Of course the notes were not lost. They were removed by the White House to weaken Fitzgerald's case. Everybody knows that.

topsecretkk9

--VERY interesting. So defense has phone records of a reporter, and prosecution has no phone records of reporters?--

huh?

Rick Ballard

Any bets on who will do the cross of Eckenrode? I'll take "anybody but Fitz" for $5.

Wells is doing an excellent job of banging through the defense witnesses very quickly. Great tactical move, IMO.

fdcol63

ROA,

{sarcasm}

And everyone knows that Cheney and Rove have the ECHELON transcripts of emails and cell phone calls between all the reporters. As well as audio and video of them at all their parties.

Just HOW did liberals think they were actually gonna get a Libby conviction?

{/end sarcasm}

LOL

PMV

FROM FDL

J Were you aware that Wilson's wife worked at CIA. When did you first learn that fact?

WP July 12.

J By phone or in person?

WP By Phone.

J Where were you?

WP At my desk at WaPo.

J Even though that's a Saturday

FROM WALTER PINCUS JULY 6, 2003

Ex-Envoy: Nuclear Report Ignored
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0706-05.htm

"While his family prepared for a Fourth of July dinner, he proudly showed a reporter photos of himself with Bush's parents. On a den wall was a framed cable to him in Baghdad, from the first President Bush, dated Nov. 20, 1990"

FROM DANA PRIEST OCT 8, 2003

The Spy Next Door
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A58650-2003Oct7&notFound=true

"One evening this summer, former diplomat Joseph Wilson sat amid the African-themed decor of his spacious Washington home, sipping a glass of beer and talking about a trip he took to Niger for the CIA. His wife, Valerie, was in the kitchen, preparing chicken for a cookout and arranging red, white and blue napkins.

...
When Valerie E. Wilson -- maiden name Plame -- introduced herself to a reporter in her home on July 3, there was no hint she was anything other than a busy mother with an unflagging smile and classy wardrobe."


On July 3, 2003 the Wilsons held a dinner that included one or more reporters. If you were a super secret CIA spy trying to keep your cover, would you invite into your home the journalists who cover the CIA? Who was at this dinner besides Pincus and Priest? Are we supposed to believe they didn't know she was CIA? The date and tone of the Priest article also raise some interesting questions. I would be interested in hearing what the learned folks at JOM think. My evaluation: Either these guys are dumb as a box of rocks, or they knew exactly who she was and think we are dumb as rocks, probably both.
I would like to thank everyone at JOM for offering the rest of us an alternate souce of information and informed opinion. Thanks for allowing me to eavesdrop on your conversation.

secarr

"Lost notes my aching ass!"

Funny, and a good point. I wonder who lost the notes? The FBI agent? or were they lost after being turned over to the SP's office?

roanoke

From FDL-

W What he told you WRT Wilson's wife.

RN: After we talked about mission, I asked why in the world they named WIlson when he had been staffer in Clinton NSC, he was believed to be critical of Bush, no experience in policy, had not been in Niger since 1970s [wrong again, Novak], so Armi said he was suggested by wife Valerie who was employee in CPD at CIA.

W You specifically recall that Armi referred to Wilson's wife by name,

RN Yes, as Valerie

W How did you come to learn her last name

RN Wilson's entry in Who's Who. It was listed as Valerie Plame

Ah ha ha ha ha!

Yesssss!!!! Novak!

Also for Empty Wheel I love how Novak gets in the swipe that Wilson hadn' t been to Niger in since the 70's.

That ain't impressive and EW it was the last time he went to Niger not for his own interests.

Carol Herman

FM: CAROL HERMAN
TO: JAVIANI

Answer to your question "why Libby and not Armitage?"

BECAUSE THE JOOOOS did it.

George Tenet, as the first paragraph of his new book, "Center of the Storm," as read by Drudge last night, (says in the most peculiar way, said Drudge) ... It's 9/12/2001. I'm about to meet the President, in the WH, for the first time. And, as I'm about to enter, coming out of the OVal Office door is RICHARD PEARL."

The Man Upstairs also knows what he's doing. And, he laughs, too. As the "Ron Popiel" slicer and dicer is cutting Fitz' charges to shredded vegetables.

Sue

Prolly a bachelor thing.

Deliberate. The poor government prosecutor up against the striped britches law firm.

P

Novak says he may have been source of Libby/Russert mistake.....

Sara (Squiggler

I hope the jurors have the same reaction I did when I first heard how Novak looked up Val's name in Who's Who. To me, this was a huge eye opener in this case.

Dan S

Topsdog,

I, and others, have been remarking all along on how so many dates that are up in question would be nailed down with a few phone records (or at least, narrowed down). Then we see Novak on the stand doing just that with phone records that Wells clearly has.

Why didn't Fitz do this? He did a LITTLE with gov side phone records, but not really all that much. I haven't seen any admittance of phone records from his reporter witnesses.

One would almost think he needs the timeline to be fuzzy.

P

"""W In context of talking to Libby did Wilson's wife come up.

RN I don't remember exactly, I might have raised that question, I got no help, and no confirmation on that issue. ...."""

Reasonable doubt??

Carol Herman

FM: CAROL HERMAN
TO: GHOST CAT

Good catch! Sear's sells suckers suits.

topsecretkk9

DanS

thanks. I just read FDL and figured out what you were referring to.

Carol Herman

FROM CAROL HERMAN

How can Dreck-enrode, not come out looking like Mark Felt, t'marra?

jwest

After watching all of the Sunday opinion shows, I think everyone at JOM should take a bow.

It’s a credit to the contributors and readers of this blog to have taken the interest in learning as much as possible about this case. When compared to nationally recognized political and press figures, the extent of their breathtaking ignorance on even the most basic facts becomes clear.

Although we will never see Clarice invited to refute one of David Schuster’s reports on Hardball, we can at least know that in our small corner of the internet, truth, logic and reason prevail.

ghostcat

CArol -

Ya got 1/2 of it. Or maybe yer jes being decent.

topsecretkk9
RN: After we talked about mission, I asked why in the world they named WIlson when he had been staffer in Clinton NSC, he was believed to be critical of Bush, no experience in policy, had not been in Niger since 1970s [wrong again, Novak], so Armi said he was suggested by wife Valerie who was employee in CPD at CIA.

W You specifically recall that Armi referred to Wilson's wife by name,

RN Yes, as Valerie

W How did you come to learn her last name

RN Wilson's entry in Who's Who. It was listed as Valerie Plame.

W Armitage did not give you the last name.

W You used the term Agency operative. Did that come from Armitage

RN I've referred to people probably too much as operatives politicians as political operatives. Didn't indicate I had knowledge of her being intell operative but as employee of CIA.

W Did you have knowledge she was covert.

RN No.

See Ghost Kitty- he on to Wilson's hit job!

Javani

""Novak says he may have been source of Libby/Russert mistake.....""

Whatever.

Nothing will ever amend his reputation that he's a tattler and can't keep a secret.

Rick Ballard

"One would almost think he needs the timeline to be fuzzy."

Watch it, buddy. Contempt of prosecutor carries a very heavy penalty - double if you've ever voted Republican.

ghostcat

TS -

Luv Novak's answer there.

Sue

RN: I had been trying to get appointment with Armitage since 2001, he had declined to see me, had indicated he just didn't want to see me. After 9/11 I tried again, got rebuffed. At the end of June, last week of June, his office contacted me, said he'd see me. Made appointment for July 8, afternoon, his office, State.

I knew it wasn't an accident. Armitage was actively looking to get Plame in print.

Carol Herman

FM: CAROL HERMAN
TO: PMV

Ah. And, exactly how was Valerie introduced to reporters in Aspen. May 2003. At the EPIC meeting? There's now enough snow there (in this story) to claim she was "off" skiing.

cathyf

Carol, I disagree. I think it's much more likely that Eckenrode is going to end up looking like Mark Furman than Mark Feldt...

jm

Novak is helping provide reasonable doubt on so many levels. First, he may have brought it up to Libby and the conversation was so close in time that Libby might reasonably have conflated it with his more heated discussion with Russert. Plus, if Libby testifies he was aware of the Mitchell video appearance ("everyone knew") on October 3, this may further explain his belief it was Russert. Second, the jury has now heard from a few reporters in this time period who Libby did not leak to. Third, if Libby was going to lie, why pick Russert when he could have said he heard it from Novak? Novak is plausibly friendlier and Libby already knew from Rove that Novak had the info.

topsecretkk9

RN Wilson's entry in Who's Who. It was listed as Valerie Plame.

Wilson fails the smell test in front of jurors

Wilson: My wife’s name is Wilson. It is Mrs. Joseph Wilson. It is Valerie Wilson. And he named her. He identified her. So that argument I don’t believe stands the test of — stands the smell test.
Alcibiades

TS: translation please:

See Ghost Kitty- he on to Wilson's hit job!

Cromagnon

Libby's lame-ass high-priced defense team is a 'tougher' opponent than Fitz? LOL Thats a hoot. They are not even defending him against the actual charges, they are more concerned with who did or who didn't out Plame and trying the confuse the jury with that. Unfortunetely for Scootie-boy, thats not what he's charged with. If I were the wingnut welfare money dispenser, I would be wanting my money back for such a lame-ass defense.

On another note, it looks like Scootie-boy isn't gonna have the balls to testify in his own defense. Pretty pathetic but I'm not surprised after the way he was grilled into submission by Fitz in the GJ. Plus it would likely result in even more perjury charges since it doesn't seem he can keep his story straight from one minute to the next

Tom Maguire

Eckenrode would be making his visit..Just my guess of course, and it could be egotism, but I doubt it.

Bravoe--TM and the horde..

Let me add a second bravo - I recall my own plaintive plea for an explanation of the lost notes, but whoever picked that up in the Fitzgerald filing did a great job. I'm bravo'ing Clarice unless I hear different.

Clarice - I tried to cast an editorial wand over this post to fix a few typos but Typepad is locking me out just now.

But while we looking for things over which to gloat - over at the traffic meter I am getting over 5,000 hits per hour (unprecedented at this blog in my memory) from the Huffington Blog - Arianna is more skeptical than Russert than I am, and linked to the "Russert, Equivocater?" post.

SO, our stories are getting out there. Kind of cool.

cathyf
Third, if Libby was going to lie, why pick Russert when he could have said he heard it from Novak? Novak is plausibly friendlier and Libby already knew from Rove that Novak had the info.
You're making it even more complicated than it is. The prosecution claims that Libby decided to lie in October, 2003. No mystery as to knowing in Oct that Novak knew in July!
Carol Herman

FROM CAROL HERMAN

Can Dreck-enrode take the 5th t'marra?

Will he just say "the notes were there when I left?"

Could there be a paper trail, then, that Fitz would be asked to introduce? In other words, exactly how is "chain of custody" arranged?

If you're passing a baby between a divorced couple, and the kid shows up missing? Can the last parent to have the kid say "I left him at the railroad station?"

topsecretkk9

Posted by: Alcibiades

I was saying the other day that Novak was one of the only reporters that was seasoned enough to get what was going on - Kerry political hit job

He didn't need to be persuaded the Veep didn't send this guy and his question was why would anyone pick a political adversary for a so-called sensitive mission.

Next time please get you TSK9 decoder ring please. ::grin::

Javani

"Libby's lame-ass high-priced blah blah"

Yawn. Nervous are you?

""On another note, it looks like Scootie-boy isn't gonna have the balls to testify in his own defense.""

Would you put him on whatever happened? Did you see how he testified at the GJ? It was like a doctor operating on himself.

topsecretkk9

Good for you TM! You deserve it!

Sue

Plus it would likely result in even more perjury charges since it doesn't seem he can keep his story straight from one minute to the next

Now that's downright funny. Libby is the only one who hasn't changed his story. Including Fitz's own witnesses. But nevermind. You want to see Libby in jail, not because you believe he lied, you believe he is protecting Cheney and that is the bigger crime, for someone on the left.

Appalled Moderate

In the superheated atmosphere of October, admitting having a conversation with Novak about Plame would have seemed very very bad, particularly if you were I Lewis Libby, who was concerned he was about to take the fall for Rove. I could see him moving the conversation with Novak to a conversation with Russert.

Still have the problem of the 7/7 conversation with Ari. (And, frankly, a "heard about it from reporters" conversation on 7/8 would be completely impossible in light of the 7/7 conversation with Ari.

ghostcat

TS -

Another crummy commercial.

Tina

The Defense is having another great day, coupled with last week when they destroyed Timmah.

jwest

I was going to reply to Cromagnon, but I realized I’d already used the phrase “breathtakingly ignorant” in a previous comment.

Alcibiades

LOL!

Check out the objective commentary from EW:

Novak looks like he's comfortable that he's gotten through this. His is now doing his nose up in the air arrogant look. and rocking gently back and forth in the chair.

hit and run

Bravo all around.

And unfortunately for most of you here, I may be the only regular who can say that he is being compensated for his work here commensurate with what he has contributed.

Sucks to be you ;-)

centralcal

Way to go, Tom!

Pofarmer

They are not even defending him against the actual charges, they are more concerned with who did or who didn't out Plame and trying the confuse the jury with that.

I beleive it's called reasonable doubt, and it looks like they are casting it in spades.

Christopher Fotos

But while we looking for things over which to gloat - over at the traffic meter I am getting over 5,000 hits per hour (unprecedented at this blog in my memory) from the Huffington Blog - Arianna is more skeptical than Russert than I am, and linked to the "Russert, Equivocater?" post.

SO, our stories are getting out there. Kind of cool.

That's positive karma payback for linking to me.

And in the end

the links you take

are equal to the links you make....

Carol Herman

FM: CAROL HERMAN
TO: CATHY F

Mark Fuhrman in the OJ Trial? We get the bimbo, and the letter "F" ... I don't think so. All racy language Armitage used has been redacted.

More like Dreck-In-Rode, or, what happens to the chicken who dares cross the road, and gets smacked by not looking out for on-coming traffic.

hit and run

Sue:
You want to see Libby in jail, not because you believe he lied, you believe he is protecting Cheney and that is the bigger crime, for someone on the left.


And let's be clear about his immediate goals.

He simply wants to derail productive conversations here.

Even I have tried to back off the snark to let the good times roll, because the productive conversations here are absolutely fascinating!!!!

Here's hoping they remain productive

Pofarmer

(And, frankly, a "heard about it from reporters" conversation on 7/8 would be completely impossible in light of the 7/7 conversation with Ari.

Why? He could be attributing a story from reporters to other reporters. It wouldn't really matter what he knew officially. I think this was brought up a while back.

Alcibiades

Thanks TS. And, uh, where can I get a TSK9 decoder ring?

::grin::

topsecretkk9

Sue

Novak describing the uniqueness of FINALLY getting the interview and then being "summoned" for it is in stark contrast to Libby's many contacts with reporters and not mentioning "her".

I bet that sunk in after that tape.

Carol Herman

FROM CAROL HERMAN

RE: READING BETWEEN THE LINES

Better than jumping and skipping to conclusions. I do believe that the tone, here, is acceptably funny.

This means that Fitz' scaffolding is tipping over, and there won't be a structure left up there where the leftoids will get to see Libby hanging off of da' line.

Our "lines" here are just a pure joy! If Wells had hit rough water sailing forward presenting his case, on this, his first day; we'd be over at the rails vomiting our guts out.

Trust me. I don't like sailing. And, I'm not sick to my stomach, now, either.

If there was a nurse present? Our pulse is beating well. And, I think as this trip extends into a longer voyage, we're gonna be touting rides like this as the best see-journeys, ever.

Alcibiades

LOL again, on Novak's description of Joe Wilson:

F First meeting with Wilson

RN On MTP. The day of his op-ed.

F You did not become fast friends.

RN We did not exchange words. Most people in the green room quietly read. He was giving his opinion at some length about how things were done in the Clinton NSC, in a very loud voice, I thought that was an obnoxious performance.

theo

Can someone explain to me this snippet from the New York Times today?

< Mr. Libby is not accused of leaking Mrs. Wilson’s name, but rather of lying to investigators and grand jurors investigating the leak. The prosecution is trying to prove he did so to protect his boss, the vice president.>

I thought Fitz told the jury that Libby lied about his role in this because he feared being fired, rather than to protect Cheney.

I know better than to trust the NYT. But are they really this blatantly wrong or did I misunderstand Fitz's theory of motive?

centralcal

Who is this lobbyist Holt, that Wells tried calling the "gossipist?" Any chance he socializes with Andrea Mitchell?

Another Bob

H&R, agree.

Can the beby pixel clubbing wait until later??

Carol Herman

FROM CAROL HERMAN

Surely, t'marra Dreck-In-Rode will be asked WHO ELSE attended the Russert (convocation).

Yes, NBC lawyer(s).

Is it too early to say Fitzgerald was there?

I think, if so, t'marra, Fitzgerald should choose the brown suit from his closet. The smell can't be hidden. But why disclose loose bowels for all to see?

everson

Please excuse CroMagnon, he just woke up on the wrong side of the rock.

owl

I disagree with whoever was dissing Novak earlier...if you put his behavior up against most of the pro journos involved with this case and also reporting on it.....I say he smells like a rose.

ARC: Brian

He was giving his opinion at some length about how things were done in the Clinton NSC, in a very loud voice, I thought that was an obnoxious performance.

Yep, that's our Joe!

Sue

I feel like Charlton Heston at the end of Planet of the Apes! Damn you! He isn't going to be asked and we aren't going to find out who the stranger on the street was.

Chants

We were linked by HuffPo?

Get the hip-waders. We are in for a poo-flinging moonbat infestation the likes of which we have never seen.

Appalled Herder

ts:

Before we conclude Armitage called the meeting to drop this piece of gossip:

1. When was Novak first aware of Wilson's column?

2. Armitage was generally not all that pro-Iraq war. Novak opposed it. These two had possible interests in common.

Sue

Before we conclude Armitage called the meeting to drop this piece of gossip:

What? Suddenly you are the voice of reason? You've been hanging out with the wrong crowd, namely that thread bunch!

Rick Ballard

Let's see if there's a Novak - Richard Hohlt - Donald Fierce - journalist X link. Any cocktail parties on the evening of July 11?

topsecretkk9

--1. When was Novak first aware of Wilson's column?--

July 8th is when Wilson's friend miraculously bumped into Novak I believe.

Appalled Herder

ts:

Before we conclude Armitage called the meeting to drop this piece of gossip:

1. When was Novak first aware of Wilson's column?

2. Armitage was generally not all that pro-Iraq war. Novak opposed it. These two had possible interests in common.

asorm

Common Dreams is PC like KOS and Joe. They may be biased.

160 missing laptops and Gates is meeting Putin. Plame was like Ames from the beginning or she turned when he went down? She went bad after he blew her.

She is upset about her cover, well, that'd be Ames.

Another Bob

everson,

A little OT entertainment for the next recess:
Be sure you have your sound turned on

Alcibiades

Glen Kessler is now called. What's up with him?

cathyf
He isn't going to be asked and we aren't going to find out who the stranger on the street was.
Maybe the defense is being cagey? They know they answer, and they are putting that person on the stand, and they want to see if that person will tell the truth about it. If not, then they recall Novak to the stand.

(Is the defense allowed to do that?)

Carol Herman

FROM CAROL HERMAN

Ya know, I'd want it on my resume that I worked hard for my boss!

As to Libby "protecting" Cheney MEME it's gonna get flushed down the toilet. Because you could ask the same question of the Secret Service detail.

For those on the left? Perhaps they never got what happened when Kerry called his Secret Service person a "son of a bitch" for thowing him down on the ski slope. Since Kerry never falls on his own.

Anyway, back then. 2004 campaign. Where Bush won re-election handily; it seems like Kerry cursing out this poor Secret Service guy really did bring boo's.

Go back to what you were doing. Why remember? The left gets confused when anyone retrieves old information from the past. They want to remain on a roll.

Too bad the slope is downhill.

azaghal

F First meeting with Wilson

RN On MTP. The day of his op-ed.

F You did not become fast friends.

IMO, this is very poor cross by F. RN immediately recognizes a hanging curve and takes it yard. You don't ask open ended questions like that of a savvy witness, used to thinking and talking on his feet. Sloppy, but also shows he's got essentially nothing to cross with. Not only didn't Libby "leak" Plame, but her husband is an obnoxious blowhard--anything else you want to know.

The contrast of all the defense press witnesses with Russert cannot--repeat, cannot--be lost on the jury. Russert's repeated "I don't recall" and "I don't know" to the most obvious questions will look even worse than they originally did.

clarice

I expect Kessler FORGOT he told Libby..Defeense counsel reaching for a Kessler article.

Could only a cretin not see as Fitz did not, that this town lives on gossip and trying to trace it was ridiculous? Especially when he didn't ask most of the people who were in the loop and when he did never asked for phone records etc.

I feel so vindicated today.

topsecretkk9

--I expect Kessler FORGOT he told Libby..Defeense counsel reaching for a Kessler article.--

Yikes. I don't get this.

Alcibiades

Go Clarice!

Com mon Dre ams

Coast to Coast AM Radio has that computer made human thing, ask it.

Hermans shouldn't worry about the tape?

clarice

With every reporter--on cross- Fitz goes into the arrangement re their depo--I think the Russert thing is something he is worried about.

cathyf
The contrast of all the defense press witnesses with Russert cannot--repeat, cannot--be lost on the jury. Russert's repeated "I don't recall" and "I don't know" to the most obvious questions will look even worse than they originally did.
So the defense brings Russert back on, and this time the juror question is, "Hey, why can't you remember all of these simple things? Do you have some disability that we should know about?"

(Yeah, yeah, sure, I know that Walton wouldn't actually allow the question to be asked. But Walton would still have to read it himself, right?)

hit and run

azaghal:
IMO, this is very poor cross by F. RN immediately recognizes a hanging curve and takes it yard.

Wow. I had totally blown by the F in that exchange. I saw it as a hanging curve, and I suppose reading the content as such, just assumed it would have been a W asking that question.

Of course, Occam's razor could be invoked to say that ADD was the reason I missed it the first time

Alcibiades

Go Clarice!

miriam

Clarice, you are more than vindicated. I have been following you on this, well it almost seems like forever.

One can only imagine how Libby feels.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Wilson/Plame